| 06:53 | <annevk> | Should adopted style sheets be cloned? |
| 06:54 | <annevk> | I guess generally we've not wanted to copy internal state, but it can be useful. And we certainly do it when cloning for internal purposes or serializing to disk. |
| 06:57 | <emilio> | Should adopted style sheets be cloned? |
| 07:07 | <annevk> | emilio: I'm not sure how adopt fits into this. I mainly meant that if you clone a document or shadow root, whether the clone should have the same adopted style sheets. |
| 07:15 | <emilio> | emilio: I'm not sure how adopt fits into this. I mainly meant that if you clone a document or shadow root, whether the clone should have the same adopted style sheets. |
| 07:58 | <hsivonen> | Thanks. I'll have to study this properly. |
| 14:15 | <annevk> | Domenic: it seems the people redefining string ended up doing so mainly due to a ReSpec bug: https://github.com/w3c/webref/issues/1619 |
| 14:19 | <evilpie> | Oh, I didn't realize that parsing comments was so complicated. I have been thinking about https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11456 and what to actually escape to make sure a comment doesn't end prematurely. |
| 14:21 | <evilpie> | Naively I had assumed all comments end with --> |
| 15:15 | <annevk> | There are many trees you can't serialize safely. Does serializing comments safely move the needle sufficiently? |
| 15:38 | <evilpie> | I guess not really? It does feel bad to me that even comments aren't safe. |
| 15:59 | <mfreed> | Hi all, just a friendly reminder to post any discussion topics for this Thursday's joint CSSWG/WHATWG/OpenUI task force meeting to the meeting agenda issue: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11476 |